01-23-2016, 12:16 PM
The CardBoard
/
C-House!
/
The CardBoard
/
No one seems to have asked, "What about better basketball?"
No one seems to have asked, "What about better basketball?"
01-23-2016, 04:44 PM
There should be plenty of room in the student section for spin bikes
They might have to survey every single fan in the building to get statistically significant results
They might have to survey every single fan in the building to get statistically significant results
01-23-2016, 10:34 PM
I was almost going to ask if they shut down the rec facilities at game time to get students to go to Maples to use the bikes and lo and behold, I just turned the game on and every bike is being used. To add to the confusion, we're up by 7 and WTH....when did Bobby Hurley replace Sendek?!?!?!
I was almost going to ask if they shut down the rec facilities at game time to get students to go to Maples to use the bikes and lo and behold, I just turned the game on and every bike is being used. To add to the confusion, we're up by 7 and WTH....when did Bobby Hurley replace Sendek?!?!?!
01-24-2016, 07:03 AM
Reminds me of a plan hatched by an AD at SJSU a decade or more ago to get students to attend games. He wanted to give free food at the games....and shut down campus food services on game day. Starve them into attendance!
01-24-2016, 09:02 AM
The frats on campus know way more about this than the athletic dept. Just put kegs in the student section and it will fill up fast. Of course, then you have the problem of all the Paly High girls.
01-24-2016, 01:51 PM
For the first time since the Monty era, we're playing greater than the sum of our individual parts. Far and away Dawkins' best coaching job thus far. If fans or students choose not to show up it's their own damn fault.
For the first time since the Monty era, we're playing greater than the sum of our individual parts. Far and away Dawkins' best coaching job thus far. If fans or students choose not to show up it's their own damn fault.
01-24-2016, 02:33 PM
exactly...
the guys on this year's team are putting it all out there... gritty, and tenacious...
they deserve far more support than they are getting...
too many fair weather fans
the guys on this year's team are putting it all out there... gritty, and tenacious...
they deserve far more support than they are getting...
too many fair weather fans
01-24-2016, 04:58 PM
At one of the early WBB games this year, I was bothered by the artificial, non-fan support (P.A. system very loud, trying to do the cheering). Thankfully, I think that has been toned down as we get into the season. At the start of the Stanford-U$C game (in L.A.), I could hear the artificial support at their site. The attendance was just 612 (ouch).
I think that too much of that leads to a lack of participation by the fans. Just sit back and observe; why cheer the team when the P.A. is doing it so much more loudly. It has to feel weird to the players to have the P.A. so loud and the fans so quiet.
I think that too much of that leads to a lack of participation by the fans. Just sit back and observe; why cheer the team when the P.A. is doing it so much more loudly. It has to feel weird to the players to have the P.A. so loud and the fans so quiet.
At one of the early WBB games this year, I was bothered by the artificial, non-fan support (P.A. system very loud, trying to do the cheering). Thankfully, I think that has been toned down as we get into the season. At the start of the Stanford-U$C game (in L.A.), I could hear the artificial support at their site. The attendance was just 612 (ouch).
I think that too much of that leads to a lack of participation by the fans. Just sit back and observe; why cheer the team when the P.A. is doing it so much more loudly. It has to feel weird to the players to have the P.A. so loud and the fans so quiet.
I think that too much of that leads to a lack of participation by the fans. Just sit back and observe; why cheer the team when the P.A. is doing it so much more loudly. It has to feel weird to the players to have the P.A. so loud and the fans so quiet.
01-24-2016, 08:38 PM
(01-24-2016, 02:33 PM)FrankO link Wrote:exactly...
the guys on this year's team are putting it all out there... gritty, and tenacious...
they deserve far more support than they are getting...
too many fair weather fans
I don't think it's a matter of fair weather fans at all. I've definitely cut down on my Stanford MBB watching. For me, there's a basic compact between fans and the teams we follow: namely, I'll follow you closely if you are trying to win, not allowing tangential b.s. (say, firing your 3-time NFC championship game appearing coach for petty reasons) to take over your club, etc.
There are people on this board who will disagree, but the continued retention of Dawkins is evidence that winning is not a priority for the club. So I can't bother to care. I'm sure the kids are great, but they ought to be guided by a better coach.
(01-24-2016, 02:33 PM)FrankO link Wrote:exactly...
the guys on this year's team are putting it all out there... gritty, and tenacious...
they deserve far more support than they are getting...
too many fair weather fans
I don't think it's a matter of fair weather fans at all. I've definitely cut down on my Stanford MBB watching. For me, there's a basic compact between fans and the teams we follow: namely, I'll follow you closely if you are trying to win, not allowing tangential b.s. (say, firing your 3-time NFC championship game appearing coach for petty reasons) to take over your club, etc.
There are people on this board who will disagree, but the continued retention of Dawkins is evidence that winning is not a priority for the club. So I can't bother to care. I'm sure the kids are great, but they ought to be guided by a better coach.
01-24-2016, 09:36 PM
ASU has a home loss to Sacramento State and we needed a layup at the buzzer to beat them. In the next 6 weeks, we will face all of the following:
@Colorado, @Utah, @C'al, Oregon, @Washington, UCLA, USC, @ASU, @Arizona.
It's not going to be pretty.
@Colorado, @Utah, @C'al, Oregon, @Washington, UCLA, USC, @ASU, @Arizona.
It's not going to be pretty.
"We should all be better." --- Bill Walton, UCLA telecast, Feb. 16, 2013
ASU has a home loss to Sacramento State and we needed a layup at the buzzer to beat them. In the next 6 weeks, we will face all of the following:
@Colorado, @Utah, @C'al, Oregon, @Washington, UCLA, USC, @ASU, @Arizona.
It's not going to be pretty.
@Colorado, @Utah, @C'al, Oregon, @Washington, UCLA, USC, @ASU, @Arizona.
It's not going to be pretty.
"We should all be better." --- Bill Walton, UCLA telecast, Feb. 16, 2013
01-24-2016, 10:52 PM
I always cheer for our team and have had season tickets for more than 20 years. If we don't make the dance again, and if Dawkins continues to be our coach, I think it may well be time to give up my seats. Maples is a shell of its former self and the team has lost most of the students. I like Muir, but he's not pushing for excellence here. JD has been given enough time to succeed, but he's only managed to take the program in the wrong direction.Â
Mediocrity should not be acceptable, especially over this protracted period of time. He is our Ben Braun and it's amazing to me the he is treated with such deference. We have so many very accomplished coaches in the AD. Johnny is not one of them and ranks in the bottom 15% in terms of coaching achievement on the Farm. Dance or Die time!
Mediocrity should not be acceptable, especially over this protracted period of time. He is our Ben Braun and it's amazing to me the he is treated with such deference. We have so many very accomplished coaches in the AD. Johnny is not one of them and ranks in the bottom 15% in terms of coaching achievement on the Farm. Dance or Die time!
I always cheer for our team and have had season tickets for more than 20 years. If we don't make the dance again, and if Dawkins continues to be our coach, I think it may well be time to give up my seats. Maples is a shell of its former self and the team has lost most of the students. I like Muir, but he's not pushing for excellence here. JD has been given enough time to succeed, but he's only managed to take the program in the wrong direction.Â
Mediocrity should not be acceptable, especially over this protracted period of time. He is our Ben Braun and it's amazing to me the he is treated with such deference. We have so many very accomplished coaches in the AD. Johnny is not one of them and ranks in the bottom 15% in terms of coaching achievement on the Farm. Dance or Die time!
Mediocrity should not be acceptable, especially over this protracted period of time. He is our Ben Braun and it's amazing to me the he is treated with such deference. We have so many very accomplished coaches in the AD. Johnny is not one of them and ranks in the bottom 15% in terms of coaching achievement on the Farm. Dance or Die time!
01-24-2016, 11:01 PM
Stanford has two basketball teams. This season one of them is playing at or above its talent level [particularly in light of significant injury issues, general inexperience among the players it relies upon the most, and the strength of schedule it has played]. The other most definitely is not.
Dawkins isn't the coach of the latter.
Dawkins isn't the coach of the latter.
Stanford has two basketball teams. This season one of them is playing at or above its talent level [particularly in light of significant injury issues, general inexperience among the players it relies upon the most, and the strength of schedule it has played]. The other most definitely is not.
Dawkins isn't the coach of the latter.
Dawkins isn't the coach of the latter.
01-25-2016, 10:43 AM
I will allow a Hall of Fame coach the occasional blip given years and years of Treemendous success! The other coach may be dealing with some injury and inexperience, but the track record since taking over in 2008 speaks for itself. There is really very little to look back upon and be proud. Golf clap.Â
If this were year 3-4, I agree, but it's past that and time to ask "For whom the bell tolls..." The years of silence in Maples are the best example. Painting it black is one way to mask attendance, or a lack thereof.
If this were year 3-4, I agree, but it's past that and time to ask "For whom the bell tolls..." The years of silence in Maples are the best example. Painting it black is one way to mask attendance, or a lack thereof.
I will allow a Hall of Fame coach the occasional blip given years and years of Treemendous success! The other coach may be dealing with some injury and inexperience, but the track record since taking over in 2008 speaks for itself. There is really very little to look back upon and be proud. Golf clap.Â
If this were year 3-4, I agree, but it's past that and time to ask "For whom the bell tolls..." The years of silence in Maples are the best example. Painting it black is one way to mask attendance, or a lack thereof.
If this were year 3-4, I agree, but it's past that and time to ask "For whom the bell tolls..." The years of silence in Maples are the best example. Painting it black is one way to mask attendance, or a lack thereof.
01-25-2016, 10:55 AM
I see positive signs based on this season as well as improvement on the part of the coaching staff (I'd like to believe due in some part to the continuity). That said, I agree that Dawkins's track record so far is solidly mediocre, which is absolutely reasonable grounds to move on.
I could be onboard with moving on, but there's a little too much: "we just need to find a Shaw/Harbaugh-like coach to turn things around". That's really hard. If we move on from Dawkins, we should expect to slip backwards in the short-term. And, there's no guarantee of what's going to happen in the medium/long-term. At best - we have a 10% shot at being a top 5% team.
The thread on Jim Mora is a great example of this - where we're happy to see UCLA "struggling" with 9-5/10-3 seasons. 28 out of 128 teams finished with 10 wins (after bowl games) this season. I (and pretty much every Stanford fan, lest someone claims I'm "settling for mediocrity") would have worshiped the ground whatever hypothetical coach we had walked on if he had those kind of seasons consistently while I was in school.
I could be onboard with moving on, but there's a little too much: "we just need to find a Shaw/Harbaugh-like coach to turn things around". That's really hard. If we move on from Dawkins, we should expect to slip backwards in the short-term. And, there's no guarantee of what's going to happen in the medium/long-term. At best - we have a 10% shot at being a top 5% team.
The thread on Jim Mora is a great example of this - where we're happy to see UCLA "struggling" with 9-5/10-3 seasons. 28 out of 128 teams finished with 10 wins (after bowl games) this season. I (and pretty much every Stanford fan, lest someone claims I'm "settling for mediocrity") would have worshiped the ground whatever hypothetical coach we had walked on if he had those kind of seasons consistently while I was in school.
I see positive signs based on this season as well as improvement on the part of the coaching staff (I'd like to believe due in some part to the continuity). That said, I agree that Dawkins's track record so far is solidly mediocre, which is absolutely reasonable grounds to move on.
I could be onboard with moving on, but there's a little too much: "we just need to find a Shaw/Harbaugh-like coach to turn things around". That's really hard. If we move on from Dawkins, we should expect to slip backwards in the short-term. And, there's no guarantee of what's going to happen in the medium/long-term. At best - we have a 10% shot at being a top 5% team.
The thread on Jim Mora is a great example of this - where we're happy to see UCLA "struggling" with 9-5/10-3 seasons. 28 out of 128 teams finished with 10 wins (after bowl games) this season. I (and pretty much every Stanford fan, lest someone claims I'm "settling for mediocrity") would have worshiped the ground whatever hypothetical coach we had walked on if he had those kind of seasons consistently while I was in school.
I could be onboard with moving on, but there's a little too much: "we just need to find a Shaw/Harbaugh-like coach to turn things around". That's really hard. If we move on from Dawkins, we should expect to slip backwards in the short-term. And, there's no guarantee of what's going to happen in the medium/long-term. At best - we have a 10% shot at being a top 5% team.
The thread on Jim Mora is a great example of this - where we're happy to see UCLA "struggling" with 9-5/10-3 seasons. 28 out of 128 teams finished with 10 wins (after bowl games) this season. I (and pretty much every Stanford fan, lest someone claims I'm "settling for mediocrity") would have worshiped the ground whatever hypothetical coach we had walked on if he had those kind of seasons consistently while I was in school.
(01-25-2016, 10:55 AM)ahuang06 link Wrote:"we just need to find a Shaw/Harbaugh-like coach to turn things around". That's really hard.
There is much truth to this.
It appears that the standard fan complaint of about 80% of college teams is that their administration simply doesn't want to win. If they really wanted to win, all they would have to do is build the fanciest facilities and go hire a new coach.
Right now exhibit A for how easy this would be is Stanford. In fact, just today in checking out what Boston College thinks of the football verbal they lost, I read it: "Stanford was terrible in football. They invested $X million in a new stadium and hired a new coach. That would be us if the administration wanted."
[not an exact quotation - paraphrase only.]
In fact, Stanford was extremely lucky in stumbling into Jim Harbaugh as coach (and possibly in his moving on as well). Perhaps there isn't another person in America who could have made that turn around as well; and it wasn't at all clear before hand he was that guy. As far as I can remember Stanford had no competition for his services other than San Diego.
(01-25-2016, 10:55 AM)ahuang06 link Wrote:"we just need to find a Shaw/Harbaugh-like coach to turn things around". That's really hard.
There is much truth to this.
It appears that the standard fan complaint of about 80% of college teams is that their administration simply doesn't want to win. If they really wanted to win, all they would have to do is build the fanciest facilities and go hire a new coach.
Right now exhibit A for how easy this would be is Stanford. In fact, just today in checking out what Boston College thinks of the football verbal they lost, I read it: "Stanford was terrible in football. They invested $X million in a new stadium and hired a new coach. That would be us if the administration wanted."
[not an exact quotation - paraphrase only.]
In fact, Stanford was extremely lucky in stumbling into Jim Harbaugh as coach (and possibly in his moving on as well). Perhaps there isn't another person in America who could have made that turn around as well; and it wasn't at all clear before hand he was that guy. As far as I can remember Stanford had no competition for his services other than San Diego.
01-25-2016, 03:16 PM
I agree that finding a good coach is hard, very hard. Monty worked to elevate the program and continuity played a part in that run. That is now in the past as we struggle to be a factor in the p12. We are mediocre. Dawkins has taken us to the Dance 1 time.Â
68 teams make the NCAA's out of 347 or roughly 20%. I believe we can find a coach that can get us there more often than our current HC. He's been given his chance and I say the seat should be hot. Even my Duke friends admit as much! Might we step back? Sure. Unless we try, we'll never know and I don't think we elevate much with the status quo. I would rather we take a chance on an up and coming coach. Look at what has happened with soccer and swimming. Why not the potential return in hoops?  Make the Dance and I'll buy another two years...
68 teams make the NCAA's out of 347 or roughly 20%. I believe we can find a coach that can get us there more often than our current HC. He's been given his chance and I say the seat should be hot. Even my Duke friends admit as much! Might we step back? Sure. Unless we try, we'll never know and I don't think we elevate much with the status quo. I would rather we take a chance on an up and coming coach. Look at what has happened with soccer and swimming. Why not the potential return in hoops?  Make the Dance and I'll buy another two years...
I agree that finding a good coach is hard, very hard. Monty worked to elevate the program and continuity played a part in that run. That is now in the past as we struggle to be a factor in the p12. We are mediocre. Dawkins has taken us to the Dance 1 time.Â
68 teams make the NCAA's out of 347 or roughly 20%. I believe we can find a coach that can get us there more often than our current HC. He's been given his chance and I say the seat should be hot. Even my Duke friends admit as much! Might we step back? Sure. Unless we try, we'll never know and I don't think we elevate much with the status quo. I would rather we take a chance on an up and coming coach. Look at what has happened with soccer and swimming. Why not the potential return in hoops?  Make the Dance and I'll buy another two years...
68 teams make the NCAA's out of 347 or roughly 20%. I believe we can find a coach that can get us there more often than our current HC. He's been given his chance and I say the seat should be hot. Even my Duke friends admit as much! Might we step back? Sure. Unless we try, we'll never know and I don't think we elevate much with the status quo. I would rather we take a chance on an up and coming coach. Look at what has happened with soccer and swimming. Why not the potential return in hoops?  Make the Dance and I'll buy another two years...
01-25-2016, 03:22 PM
The correct metric isproportion of Pac-12 conference teams that make the dance, since lots of teams are in one-bid conferences. The Pac-13 gets between 3 and 6 teams in a year; say five on average (going off memory), so 5/12 ought to be a 42% rate.
On the plus side, DAWKINS is winning the NIT at a higher than expected rate.
BC
On the plus side, DAWKINS is winning the NIT at a higher than expected rate.
BC
The correct metric isproportion of Pac-12 conference teams that make the dance, since lots of teams are in one-bid conferences. The Pac-13 gets between 3 and 6 teams in a year; say five on average (going off memory), so 5/12 ought to be a 42% rate.
On the plus side, DAWKINS is winning the NIT at a higher than expected rate.
BC
On the plus side, DAWKINS is winning the NIT at a higher than expected rate.
BC
01-25-2016, 05:45 PM
(01-24-2016, 09:02 AM)rudruff link Wrote:The frats on campus know way more about this than the athletic dept. Just put kegs in the student section and it will fill up fast. Of course, then you have the problem of all the Paly High girls.
Which was...?
Audaces fortuna iuvat
(01-24-2016, 09:02 AM)rudruff link Wrote:The frats on campus know way more about this than the athletic dept. Just put kegs in the student section and it will fill up fast. Of course, then you have the problem of all the Paly High girls.
Which was...?
Audaces fortuna iuvat
01-25-2016, 06:01 PM
76lsjumb, let's wait a bit before we proclaim this team over-achieving, and this coaching staff improving.
ASU is NOT a good team; yet, they almost beat Stanford at the monastery known as Maples. Let's see how we all feel about the team/program after this 3-game roadie; or better yet, when the season is done. If history is any guide - and most of us hope it will not be - there is a swoon coming.
ASU is NOT a good team; yet, they almost beat Stanford at the monastery known as Maples. Let's see how we all feel about the team/program after this 3-game roadie; or better yet, when the season is done. If history is any guide - and most of us hope it will not be - there is a swoon coming.
76lsjumb, let's wait a bit before we proclaim this team over-achieving, and this coaching staff improving.
ASU is NOT a good team; yet, they almost beat Stanford at the monastery known as Maples. Let's see how we all feel about the team/program after this 3-game roadie; or better yet, when the season is done. If history is any guide - and most of us hope it will not be - there is a swoon coming.
ASU is NOT a good team; yet, they almost beat Stanford at the monastery known as Maples. Let's see how we all feel about the team/program after this 3-game roadie; or better yet, when the season is done. If history is any guide - and most of us hope it will not be - there is a swoon coming.
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »